The High Court has delivered a landmark decision in Bird v DP1. with the majority finding that there had to be an employment relationship to give rise to a finding of vicarious liability on the part of the Diocese for the sexual assaults committed by the priest. The High Court found “the priest was not an employee or “agent” of the Diocese and his actions were not done with the express or implied authorisation of the Diocese”. Accordingly, the High Court found that the Diocese was not liable for the sexual assaults committed by the priest.
This decision will have far reaching ramifications to many claims on foot, providing clarity and confirming that an employment relationship must exist in order for a finding of vicarious liability to be possible. Relationships that are ‘akin to employment’, such as volunteers/independent contracts, will not give rise to the possibility of a finding of vicarious liability.
The decision can be found here.
1 BIRD v DP (A PSEUDONYM) [2024] HCA 41
This article may provide CPD/CLE/CIP points through your relevant industry organisation.
The material contained in this publication is in the nature of general comment only, and neither purports nor is intended to be advice on any particular matter. No reader should act on the basis of any matter contained in this publication without considering, and if necessary, taking appropriate professional advice upon their own particular circumstances.
